CHAPTER 2. Reforms of the Health Care System in Romania

Transcription

1 Reforms of Health Care System in Romania CHAPTER 2 Reforms of the Health Care System in Romania Ana-Claudia Bara, Wim van den Heuvel, Johannes A.M. Maarse Published in Croatian Medical Journal 2002 (43): Abstract Aim: To describe health care reforms and analyze the transition of the health care system in Romania in the period. Method: Policy documents, political intentions and objectives of health care reforms were analyzed, new legislation was described and changes in the financial resources of the health care system were presented. Results: The reforms of the health care system in Romania have been realized in a rather difficult context of scarcity of financial and human resources. The Gross Domestic Product spent on health care in 2000 was 4% and the number of physicians in 1999 was 42,975. The main changes due to the legislative reforms have been the introduction of a new social health insurance and strengthening of the position of family physicians. Negative effects of the reforms have been the decrease in health care accessibility and growing inequity in utilization of health care services. Health care users still pay physicians under the table and have more out-of-pocket health care expenses. Conclusion: Future reforms in Romania should encourage the positive effects of current reforms: free choice of physician, autonomy of the primary health care system, and increasing financial resources for the health care system. Keywords: health care reform; accessibility of health care; health care legislation; quality of health care; Romania. 11

2 Chapter Introduction Since the fall of communism in 1989, Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries have been undergoing major societal changes, switching from centralized planning to a market-oriented economic system. Their health care systems also went through fundamental reforms. The health care reforms in Romania differ from those in other CEE countries like Poland, Hungary and Slovenia, due to the long-term underfunding of the health care system during the Ceausescu regime and the low quality of medical equipment. After 40 years of central control and a nationalized economy, with rather poor health status of the population, the current Romanian health care system is in crisis [1]. The aims of this study were to describe the major changes in the health care system in Romania during the transition period (from 1989 to 2001], analyze new legislation, present the context in which the reforms have to be implemented, and analyze the possible effects of health policy reforms. 2.2 Historical Background of Health Care Reforms in Romania The State Law on Health Organization passed in 1949 initiated a gradual transition from the pre-war Bismarck system into a Semashko health system, which was based on the principles of universal coverage, state financing, central planning, and free access at the point of delivery. This system functioned until the beginning of the 1990s. The main features of the Romanian health care system during those four decades were government financing, central planning and management, and a state monopoly over health services [2]. Primary health care in Romania had been provided mainly by dispensaries, which had been part of the hospital system and had served as primary health care centres for the population living in the area [3]. Due to the nationalized economy, health care had been characterized by the absence of a private sector, as well as by the fact that all professionals in health care had had the status of salaried civil servants [2]. In the beginning, the principles of the Semashko model, i.e., free access to medical services for everybody and equity in distribution of medical provision and physicians throughout the entire territory of the country, brought some improvement in the health status of the population [4]. However, after a few decades the situation changed completely. As the entire health care sector was considered unproductive, i.e., requiring money rather than generating it, it was chronically underfunded. Between 1985 and 1989, only 2.2% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was spent on health care [2], compared with the (official) East European average of 5.4% in It has to be kept in mind, though, that health care systems in all CEE countries were, in general, underfunded [5]. 12

3 Reforms of Health Care System in Romania The negative effects of the changes in health policy between the 1950s and 1980s were reflected in the life expectancy of the Romanian population, which rose steadily between 1956 and 1975 and then started to decrease until the beginning of the 1990s [5]. Although the Romanian government implemented measures in 1983 to allow free choice of ones own doctor (but at the same time introducing out-ofpocket payment for their services), the absence of competition or individual initiative, underfunding, inefficiency, inflexible norms, and inadequate health care equipment and facilities led to increasing pressure for reforms [2]. Therefore, after the breakdown of the communist regime in Romania, reform of the health care system began. 2.3 Socioeconomic and Political Context of Health Care Reforms The implementation of health care reforms in Romania interfered with the socioeconomic (transition from a state-planned to a free market economy) and political context in the country. This resulted in both an increase in the economic inequality of Romanian citizens, with a high percentage of them living in absolute poverty, and an increase in unemployment (from 3% in 1991 to 13% in 2000). Politically, the process of transition to a liberal democracy was very slow and the policies were incoherent due to the very frequent changes in management staff [6]. Also, the health status of the Romanian population was extremely poor. The life expectancy of people at birth was 69.2 years in 1977, the lowest among 11 CEE countries in the region [3]. Infant mortality was 22/1,000 live births, compared with 13.4/1,000 in the 11 CEE countries and 5.3/1,000 in the EU. The rate of infectious diseases like tuberculosis was one of the highest in Europe [7]. As in all CEE countries in transition, health care in Romania was not one of the public financing priorities [8]. The expenditure on health care services was relatively low; in terms of GDP, it was less than half of that spent by EU candidate countries and almost four times less than the average expenditure in EU countries [9]. Despite a difficult economic situation, the percentage of GDP allocated to the health care system increased from 2.8% in 1997 to 4.0% in 2000 [9]. Between 1995 and 2000, the health care budget increased from US$1,088 million to US$1,340 million and, although GDP started to decrease in 1998, health care expenditure has continued to increase (Fig. 1). 13

4 Chapter 2 Thousands of Billions of US $ (GDP) Years Billions of US $ (Expenditure on Health Care) Figure 1. Public expenditure (squares) on health care in Romania during and gross domestic product (GDP, rhombs) [9]. 2.4 Policy Documents, Political Intentions and Legislative Framework of the Reforms The need for the reform of health care policies was also reported by experts from the EU and the World Health Organization [9]. Thus, the Ministry of Health initiated a new health policy, which included accessibility to health care, solidarity in funding health services, and incentives for effectiveness, efficiency, and adequacy of health care delivery to health care needs. In addition, autonomy of health professionals and cooperation between the health care and other services that influence health, such as education and social services were to be promoted [9]. The political goals of health care reform were to improve the health status of the population and efficiency in use of resources, to change the patientphysician relationship, and to increase the level of satisfaction of both the population and health care providers [9]. Since 1991, several new laws and regulations have been passed to introduce changes into the health care system. Decentralization of the health care system, which aimed to increase local autonomy, started with the Public Administration Law passed in Public services belonging to Ministries were passed to the bodies under the authority of the Prefect (the political leader of a district), and 42 district health directorates were created, one for each district and one for the capital city, which were responsible for funding and managing dispensaries. These institutions made agreements with general practitioners (as individuals or groups), specifying services and standards [6]. In 1999, each district health directorate was split into two types of institutions: District Directorates for Public Health and District Health Insurance Funds. The 42 District Health Insurance Funds are responsible for collection of premiums and provision of reimbursements within their respective districts. There is a National Health Insurance Fund that sets the rules and regulations for the District Health 14

5 Reforms of Health Care System in Romania Insurance Funds and has the right to reallocate up to 25% of the collected funds to under-financed districts [6]. The National Health Insurance Fund negotiates the framework contract with the Romanian College of Physicians, which sets up the benefit package to which the insured are entitled and the resources allotted according to the different types of care. The National Health Insurance Fund also has the right to implement regulations mandatory to all District Health Insurance Funds to insure coherence of the health insurance system [6]. The private sector in the field of health care was created in the period [10], but its development has been very slow in most sectors except dentistry and pharmacy. Since 1995, important laws and legislative measures concerning the structure and organization of the Romanian health care system have been passed [6]. The most important were Law 74/1995 [11] related to the Practice of Medical Profession, Establishment, Organization and Functioning of the College of Physicians, Law 145/1997 [12] on Social Health Insurance, Law 100/1998 [13] on Public Health, and Law 146/1999 [14] on Organization, Functioning and Financing of Hospitals. In the area of pharmaceuticals, the most important new regulation has been the Emergency Ordinance 152 on pharmaceutical products for human use, passed on October 14, 1999 [6]. In 1998, the Law on Social Health Insurance was implemented. This law follows a Bismarckian insurance model with compulsory health insurance and is based on the principle of solidarity functioning within a decentralized system. According to Cockerham [1], this law, long overdue because of the poor state of the health care system, is the first reform measure in health care since the beginning of communist rule in Law 146/1999 on Hospital Organization mainly stipulates forms of hospital financing, indicates the financing of the teaching hospitals, outlines procedures for contracting between hospitals and the health insurance funds, sets out payment of hospital staff, and identifies hospital accreditation, governance and management [6]. Concerning the management and governance of hospitals, the law states that hospitals should have an operational managerial staff and be led by a council board. Hospitals are allowed significant autonomy in terms of the decision-making process and freedom to use the allotted budgets. Implementation of this law started in July 1999 [6]. Law 74/1995 defines the physicians role and status. This law also establishes the College of Physicians as a professional, non-profit organization that represents physicians interests. It stipulates the tasks of the College of Physicians as supporting scientific research, organizing scientific activities and holding trials for infringements of professional ethics, and assures quality in 15

6 Chapter 2 medical services. There are 42 district Colleges of Physicians and a National College of Physicians. Law 100/1998 regulates activities in the field of public health. Within the Ministry of Health there are District Directorates for Public Health for each district, including Bucharest [10,15]. These are decentralized units of the Ministry of Health, representing the public health authority at the district level. The District Directorates for Public Health implement national policies and programs at the local level. Their activities include preventive medicine, medical inspection, registration of new medical units, licensing, control, statistical review and financial accountability [10,15]. 2.5 Human Resources of the Romanian Health Care System The relative number of health care professionals is low compared with other countries (Table 1). Table 1. Total number of Romanian health care professionals per 10,000 inhabitants compared with selected European countries in 1998 Health care providers Country * No. Physicians Romania 18 EU average 31 UK 17 Italy 58 Hungary 31 Poland 23 Dentists Romania 2.3 EU average 6.8 Hungary 4 Poland 4 Pharmacists Romania 0.7 EU average 7.1 France 11 Netherlands 2 Hungary 5 Poland 5 * Source for Romania: ref. 9; and ref. 16 for other countries 16

7 Reforms of Health Care System in Romania Since 1989, the number of pharmacists, dentists and nurses has decreased due to their low income, as opposed to a slight increase in the number of physicians (Table 2) [15]. As far as institutions are concerned, Romania had 428 hospitals, 3,405 dentist offices, 4,052 pharmacies, and 755 pharmaceutical offices in 1999 [7]. In 1998, Romania had over 164,000 hospital beds, including short-term care and long-term care beds (7.3 beds per 1,000 people). The number of beds differed from region to region, ranging from 10.5 beds per 1,000 people in the west and Bucharest to 6.9 in the south [6]. The ratio of 7.3/1,000 for in-patient beds was higher than the average level of 6.9/1,000 in EU countries [16]. In comparison with Sweden, Romania had almost twice as many in-patient beds. In comparison with Poland (5.3/1,000), the Romanian ratio was also higher, but lower than that in Hungary (8.2/1,000)[16]. Table 2. Number of health care providers (No. of providers per 10,000 inhabitants) in Romania in 1989, 1995, and 1999 [9] Health care providers No. of health care providers (per 10,000 inhabitants) in Physicians 41,938 (18.1) 40,112 (17.7) 42,975 (19.1) Dentists 7,116(3.1) 6,045(2.7) 5,261(2.3) Pharmacists 6,432(2.8) 2,646(1.2) 1,598(0.7) Ancillary medical staff * 135,664 (58.6) 128,460 (56.6) 114,027 (50.8) Privatization in the health care sector has been limited and has encompassed mainly the fields of dentistry and pharmacy, whereas in primary and secondary health care the percentage of private practices has been very low [2]. The number of dentists offices with private majority ownership increased to 3,405 in 1999 and the number of dental laboratories with private majority ownership to 1,151 [7]. In 1999, the number of pharmacies with private majority ownership increased to 3,518 and the number of pharmaceutical offices with private majority ownership increased to 715 [7]. The number of surgeries with private majority ownership also increased to 3,820 in 1999 [7]. At the same time, privatization of hospitals was slow; there were only two hospitals with private majority ownership in 1998 and three in 1999 [7]. * Ancillary staff includes medical assistants, nurses, sanitary technicians, medical administrators, midwives, laboratory assistants, and other categories of medical staff with equivalent secondary school degrees. 17

8 Chapter Main Romanian Health Care Reform Changes The main changes caused by the legislative measures concern the health insurance system, the role of health care institutions and health care providers, the quality of care and the effects of the health care reforms on users. Health Insurance System Under the Social Health Insurance Law, a Bismarckian insurance model has been developed on the principle of solidarity, with compulsory health insurance. Employees pay 7% and the self-employed 14% of their gross incomes before income tax. Employers premiums equal 7% of total salaries. Local district budgets provided by District Health Insurance Funds pay contributions for those with low incomes and those on maternity leave or caring for sick children. Premiums for the unemployed are paid from the unemployment aid budget, and for pensioners and their family members from the social security budget [2]. Since 1998, the sources of financing for the health care system have changed in terms of an almost complete reduction of the state budget and the introduction of the insurance fund (Fig. 2]. At present, the national budget for health care has two major sources: the state budget and the health insurance funds, the latter representing more than two-thirds of the total health care budget [6]. Figure 2. The financial sources of health care expenditure in Romania during : state budget, local budget, special fund and reimbursed credits [9] Role of Health Care Institutions and Health Care Providers Before 1997, the hospitals were responsible for managing and funding both primary and secondary health care. The dispensaries had belonged to the 18

9 Reforms of Health Care System in Romania Ministry of Health and had been administered through the local hospital that also held territorial funds for them [6]. In this way, primary health care was disadvantaged from the financial point of view. For example, in 1995, primary health care (rural and urban dispensaries and polyclinics) used only 23% of the total sum allotted to primary and secondary health care [17]. After the new health laws had been passed, major changes occurred in the roles of health care institutions and providers. The Health directorates were given the responsibility of organizing primary health care and GPs had to organize their own practices. The civil servant status of physicians changed; they became "budget holders" in primary health care, contracted by the public health insurance funds, with their salaries comprised of weighted capitation and fee-for-service payments. GPs also assumed the new role of gatekeeper for secondary health care and some of them have opened private medical offices. Hospitals were budgeted and their personnel were on salary. The Law on Hospital Organization passed in 1999 stipulated significant autonomy for the hospitals in terms of their decision-making process and freedom to use the allocated budgets to finance their staffs negotiated salaries, facilities, and expensive equipment. Only 3% of the budget goes to capital investment, forcing hospitals to seek other sources of revenue [18]. In time, this measure could stimulate an improvement in the quality of health care provided in the hospitals, leading their staff to compete on the market to acquire more resources. At the same time, the budget allocated to a hospital is no longer based on the number of staff or beds but on both the performance and the profile of the hospital. Reforms left some roles and institutions unchanged, and this has reflected negatively on health care. The role of the nurse has remained almost unchanged. In fact, after nurse training ceased in 1978, the nurse was reduced to the level of a medical assistant. There has been no respect for the autonomy of the nurse, little teamwork, and no understanding that the skills of the nurse and the physician are complementary. In 1990, a Romanian Nursing Association was founded to set standards and to create a nationally coherent policy for the profession. However, the only change in the role of the nurse has been that nurses working in primary health care have started making house calls. As for secondary and tertiary health care, the delivery of medical services to a territorially defined population has remained unchanged, except for emergencies. Quality of Care The process of quality assurance ensures safety, efficacy, efficiency and effectiveness for both the providers and financers of the health service and is essential to guarantee patients rights and satisfaction [10]. "Quality of care" is mentioned in several laws in Romania. The Romanian College of Physicians 19

10 Chapter 2 has the duty to observe the quality of medical care through certification and peer review and to improve the quality of medical services [11]. The Health Insurance House supervises the quality of health care offered by the insurance system. Private practices have to meet specific standards and rules related to quality of care issues before being licensed. The advantage is that Romanian medical staff is highly qualified. Physicians and pharmacists are well trained in public and private medical schools and universities. Specialization of physicians is in line with the latest standards of the European Union. Also, there are several programs for retraining nurses and other medical staff to improve the quality of their services [6]. However, there are some barriers that have a negative effect on quality assurance [10]. First, there are financial constraints, i.e., the slow growth of the economy disallows more money for excellent programs. Second, incomes are low in every profession and this does not encourage more conscious delivery of quality care and hygiene to the consumers. Third, due to the ineffective system of public information and the paternalistic behaviour of most physicians, the medical culture of the population is not well developed. Romanian patients usually only expect good medical treatment from physicians, but not quality assurance or their own involvement in making decisions concerning their health. The fourth obstacle is corruption, even in hospitals and ambulatories. Patients feel obliged to give under-the-table money to doctors and nurses to receive good services [10]. The main quality approaches used so far have been registration and licensing of physicians and health care institutions, certification, accreditation, registration of drugs, medical devices and blood products, and the practice of peer reviews. At present, the Institute of Health Management is developing unified norms and guidelines of quality assurances [6]. Effects of Health Care Reforms on Users All changes related to the new legislation and regulations have an impact on the health care delivery and health of the population, but there is little quantitative information on the extent of this impact. However, some potential effects may be derived from the measures taken and ongoing processes. Privatization in health care may stimulate competition and quality but at the same time it may create inequality and inaccessibility of health care for specific groups. Therefore, the privatization process, maintained under strong regulations, is a positive aspect of the reforms of the health care system in Romania. There are some consequences of the new legislation. There is inequity depending on health insurance status and rural/urban living situation. Until 1998, universal coverage of population was assured through the National 20

11 Reforms of Health Care System in Romania Health Service. Since 1998, the coverage for all permanent residents of the country has been assured by the legal requirement to pay health insurance contributions [3]. Thus, the transition from "socialized" to "insurance" medicine [19] deprived certain categories of people, i.e., the unemployed and the elderly, who are the most frequent users (see Table 3). Table 3. The major effects of health care reforms on users Legislative Groups/ individuals Mechanisms Effects Measures involved as users Free choice Patients It may initiate more involvement of More autonomy; more consumers in making decisions related responsibility; and to the health care providers and their possible change of the services. In this way patients responsiveness role of patient into the may stimulate their involvement. role of user of physicians Mandatory Unemployed people more After 27 months, people are no longer registered Reduced accessibility health than 27 months, without as unemployed, so they are not insured any or inaccessibility of insurance employed close members more, unless they do not have a close family health care services of the families (specially member who is insured. Therefore they unemployed single parents) have to pay for each medical service. People working in the rural Usually uninsured because they are not able to Reduced accessibility area (40% of the pay an amount of money to the district insurance or inaccessibility of population). fond on a monthly basis, due to the low and health care services instable income, thus they have to pay out of the pocket for each medical service. Unofficial employed [20] Since employers have to pay for their employees Reduced accessibility a contribution to insurance fund (Health or inaccessibility of Insurance Law), they prefer to hire persons in health care services an unofficial way. No social protection of such employees in the "black market" [3]. People who live in the Under the Health Insurance Law, local councils Unequal distribution of under serviced areas can offer different incentives to physicians or health care providers; nurses to provide services in underserved areas [3]. Reduced accessibility But, in reality, the local budgets are very poor and or inaccessibility of cannot sustain these expenses. health care services With respect to districts in Romania, regional differences in health care spending per capita are large. In 1997, health care expenditure per capita in Bucharest was 167% of the average expenditure per capita for the country as a whole, whereas in Giurgiu only half of the national average was spent [6]. In addition, the amount of premium collected by employers is lower than expected because of the lack of experience and skills of the people who 21

12 Chapter 2 collect the revenues. At the same time, there are employers who resist paying these premiums and prefer hiring personnel unofficially Discussion What the effects of the health care reforms will be on the health status of the population in Romania, on equity in accessibility to and quality of health care, and on the role of the providers can only be answered by longitudinal evaluation research. Physicians strongly supported the changes in the health care system, especially the compulsory health insurance, since they expected an increase of income as a result. The Romanian government thus increased the financial resources allocated to health care [17] and started to develop a new marketdriven orientation in health care [19]. The health insurance scheme presumes the existence of skilled human resources and an adequate information infrastructure. Since collected premiums are lower than the expected revenues, questions arise about the infrastructure and the effectiveness of the collection system [6]. The management skills of some staff members are under discussion and there are also operational problems [21]. However, in some districts the health insurance offices are doing very well. Health insurance should be embedded in a system of social security [22]. Therefore, policymakers should initiate programs to support the health care expenses of those categories of people "forgotten" by the law. Transferring the responsibility for the health care of people with low income to local authorities is not a solution, as has been proved by the Russian experience [19]. It is recommended to start with a more flexible system (e.g. that insures those who cannot pay some or all of the full contribution, as in Macedonia [23]). The implementation of the Social Health Insurance Law has caused conflict between the actors, as in Russia [24]. The result is a delay in reimbursing the money covering the medication and consequent increase in the cost of medication. Under-the-table-payment is an unsolved problem inherited from a past health care system, which is not on the policy makers priority list. In a country with widening income disparities, under-the-table-payments are a serious problem that hampers the accessibility of health care for people on low incomes. There is little quantitative information on the extent of informal outof-pocket payments. According to the President of the Romanian Federative Chamber of Physicians, these unofficial payments could exceed 60% of the total amount of money in the health care system [20]. A reform must have public support if it is to be successful. However,

13 Reforms of Health Care System in Romania consumers in Romania did not attend periodic meetings with the reform team as physicians in primary and secondary health care did [2]. Therefore, there is no feedback from "lay people" on the changes. Consumer involvement in both development of reform and its implementation could be realized through organized "protection of consumers". Also, the transition from patient to user role should be sustained by political decisions. A good start may be research on evaluation of the impact of health care reforms on users, like in Slovenia [25]. At the same time, some legislative measures that would stimulate nongovernmental and voluntary organizations might increase the consumer involvement in health care. Health care policymakers often use the words "privatization" and "decentralization" in policy documents and political statements, which may have many different meanings. What they mean exactly by those words is less evident. In fact, the decentralization of the Romanian health care system is being established in three ways: functional deconcentration, prefectorial deconcentration and devolution [6]. Regarding the concept of "privatization", the White book of the Ministry of Health and Family specifies that there is "privatization of almost 100% of primary health care" [9]. The term is used because the medical offices are rented to general practitioners, who have managerial status and a practice budget. The new legislation does not offer much real privatization (the right to dispose, the right to sell and purchase, and the right to use), as in Slovenia [22]. As a result of this quasi-privatization, more out-of-pocket money is paid for secondary health care. In Europe, only providers perceive the difference between public and private institutions, not users, because the insurance companies reimburse the expenses [22]. The development of the Romanian health care system raises the following question: How much revolution and how much evolution is there in this reform? The answer remains to be seen. References: 1 Cockerham WC. Health and social change in Russia and Eastern Europe. Brighton, New York: Brunner-Routledge; World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe. Health care systems in transition. Copenhagen: WHO; Schneider M, Cerniauskas G, Murauskiene L. Health systems of Central and Eastern Europe. Augsburg: Basys; Zarcovic G, Enachescu D. Probleme privind politicile de sanatate in tarile Europei Centrale si de Rasarit (Problems related to health policies in Central European Countries). Bucharest: Infomedica; Marree J, Groenewegen PP. Back to Bismarck: Eastern European health care systems in transition. Aldershot: Avebury;

14 Chapter 2 6 European Observatory on Health Care Systems. Health care systems in transition. Copenhagen: European Observatory on Health Care Systems, World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe; Romanian Statistical Yearbook. Bucharest: National Institute of Statistics; Oreškovic S. New priorities for health sector reform in Central and Eastern Europe. Croat Med J 1998; 39: Ministry of Health and Family. Cartea alba a preluarii guvernarii, decembrie 2000 in domeniul sanatatii (White book of government in the field of health care 2000). Available from: Accessed: December 11, Federal Ministry of Social Security and Generations. Quality policy in the health care systems of the EU accession candidates. Vienna: Federal Ministry of Social Security and Generations; Law 74 from 06 th of July 1995 related to the Practice of Medical Profession, Establishment, Organization and Functioning of the College of Physicians published in Official Gazette no 149 from 14 th of July Law 145 from 24 th of July 1997 on Social Health Insurance published in Official Gazette no 178 from 31 st of July Law 100 from 26 th of May 1998 governing Public Health published in Official Gazette no 204 from 1 st of June Law 146 from 27 th of July 1999 on Organization, Functioning and Financing of Hospitals published in Official Gazette no 370 from 3 rd of August Berciu I, Vladescu C. Legislatie si reforma sanitara in perioada de tranzitie. (Legislation and health care reforms during the transition). Bucharest: Cosal; OECD health data A comparative analysis of 30 OECD countries. User s Guide. (data on CD-ROM). Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Develoment. Toronto, Canada Vladescu C. Politica de reforma a sistemului de sanatate din Romania (Policy of reforming of health care system in Romania). Bucharest: Infomedica; McKee M, Healy J, editors. Hospitals in a changing Europe. European Observatory on Health Care Systems Series. Buchingham, Philadelphia: Open University Press; Field MG. Reflections on a painful transition: from socialized to insurance medicine in Russia. Croat Med J 1999; 40: N/E/R/A The health care system in Romania. London: Pharmaceutical Partners; Visschedijk J. A fresh look at health for all. Medicus Tropicus 1997;35 Anniversary suppl: Cernic Istenic M. Privatization of health care in Slovenia. Croat Med J 1998;39: Ivanovska L, Ljuma I. Health sector reform in the Republic of Macedonia. Croat Med J 1999;40: Shishkin S. Problems of transition from tax- based system of health care finance to mandatory health insurance model in Russia. Croat Med J 1999;40: Markota M, Švab I, Saražin Klemencic K, Albreht T. Slovenian experience on health care reform. Croat Med J 1999;40:

Background Briefing Hungary s Healthcare System By Shannon C. Ferguson and Ben Irvine (2003) In the aftermath of communist rule, Hungary transformed its healthcare system from centralised Semashko state

CHALLENGES FOR ROMANIAN HEALTH SECTOR IN BECOMING A SUSTAINABLE SYSTEM ABSTRACT Ana-Mădălina POTCOVARU 1 The aim of this paper is the evaluation of the current status on health services and the objectives

Social health protection : Comparison between Belgium and Thailand Thomas Rousseau COOPAMI-NIHDI 3.11.2014 Overview 1. Comparison between Belgium and Thailand 2. The Belgium system more in detail Overview

OECD Reviews of Health Systems Mexico Summary in English The health status of the Mexican population has experienced marked progress over the past few decades and the authorities have attempted to improve

Best Practices in the European Countries Poland DRAFT The views expressed do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations and of Italian Department for Public Administration,

Economics of A Family Practice in Krakow Mukesh Chawla, Ph.D. Senior Health Economist and Department Associate Department of Population and International Health Harvard School of Public Health 665 Huntington

Overview of Medical Service Regime in Japan 75 years or older 10% copayment (Those with income comparable to current workforce have a copayment of 30%) 70 to 74 years old 20% copayment* (Those with income

APPENDIX C HONG KONG S CURRENT HEALTHCARE FINANCING ARRANGEMENTS and Healthcare Expenditures C.1 Apart from the dedication of our healthcare professionals, the current healthcare system is also the cumulative

SHANGHAI PROFILE OF THE HEALTH SERVICES SYSTEM (7 February 2004) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Shanghai is a municipal city of China. The city is now divided into 18 districts and 1 county. There were 132 towns, 3

HEALTHCARE AND HEALTHCARE EQUIPMENTS With the coming into force of the much-sought Social Security and General Health Insurance Law as of 2007, private hospitals are under construction all over the country

POLICY PAPER European issue n 196 28 th february 2011 from Florence Kamette, Consultant, specialised in the comparative analysis of foreign law A Comparative Analysis Dependency Care in the EU Abstract

Sweden Single payer, universal healthcare system, with 21 county councils as the primary payer (reimburser) Administration of healthcare plan is decentralized in the hands of the county councils Central

The healthcare in Poland The Health Care system in Poland A group of people and institutions established to provide the healthcare for the population. Polish health care system is based on an insurance

Single Payer Systems: Equity in Access to Care Lynn A. Blewett University of Minnesota, School of Public Health The True Workings of Single Payer Systems: Lessons or Warnings for U.S. Reform Journal of

The State of Oral Health in Europe Professor Kenneth Eaton Chair of the Platform for Better Oral Health in Europe 1 TOPICS TO BE COVERED What is the Platform? Its aims and work The report (State of Oral

Can a tulip become a rose? The Dutch route of guided self-regulation towards a community based integrated health care system. Niek Klazinga, Diana Delnoij, Isik Kulu-Glasgow Department of Social Medicine

Improving healthcare provider payment methods in Russia ("Pharmaboardroom") Introducing new reimbursement systems As of January 1, 2014 Russia introduced a new method of payment for inpatient medical services

HEALTHCARE FINANCING REFORM: THE CASE in TURKEY Prof. Ahmet Burcin YERELI aby@hacettepe.edu.tr Department of Public Finance, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Hacettepe University Research

Journal of US-China Public Administration, February 2015, Vol. 12, No. 2, 153-165 doi: 10.17265/1548-6591/2015.02.008 D DAVID PUBLISHING Conditions for Development of the Private Health Insurance in Poland

The German health system: basics and some comparisons with other countries Prof. Dr. med. Reinhard Busse, MPH Department ofhealthcare Management/ WHO Collaborating Centre for Health Systems, Research and

Health insurance systems in The Netherlands March 22, 2003 Authors: Fons Bertens, Head of Statistics Department of The Netherlands Health Insurance Institution Jan Bultman, Lead Health Specialist, World

HEALTH CARE DELIVERY IN BRITAIN AND GERMANY: TOWARDS CONVERGENCE? Background: Two different health care systems Generally speaking, the British and the German health care systems differ not only with respect

The role of the Socialist Mutual Health fund in the management of the Belgian healthcare system Basic principles and key features Department of European and International Affairs Alain Coheur Presentation

Health systems in the Netherlands NVAG studiereis Estland juni 2010 1 NVAG studiereis Estland juni 2010 2 Between 1970 and 2006 the life expectancy at birth of the Dutch population has increased from 73.6

HOSPITAL SUBSECTOR ANALYSIS Fourth Health Sector Development Project (RRP MON 41243) A. Introduction 1. The health status of the people of Mongolia has generally improved over the years, and significant

Health care in Australia Stephen R. Leeder MD Professor of Public Health and Community Medicine Director The Menzies Centre for Health Policy The University of Sydney March 26th 2012 Australia at a glance

Social insurance, private insurance and social protection. The example of health care systems in some OECD countries References OECD publications on Health care Swiss Re publications Sigma No 6/2007 on

Regional Inequality in Healthcare in China QIAN Jiwei* Regional inequality in healthcare in China is particularly wide. Since 2007, the central government has increased earmarked healthcare transfers to

Improved Medicare for All Quality, Guaranteed National Health Insurance by HEALTHCARE-NOW! Single-Payer Healthcare or Improved Medicare for All! The United States is the only country in the developed world

1 March 2009 PRESENTATION OF THE CROATIAN PENSION SYSTEM Croatian social security system is mostly the insurance based, with exception of family benefits (children allowance- doplatak za djecu) and the

(i) The legal and institutional framework 1. Provide details of the legal framework by which the programme(s) is established: The Constitution of the Republic of Macedonia 1991 Law on Social Protection,

THE COMMONWEALTH FUND 2005 INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON HEALTH CARE POLICY DESCRIPTIONS OF HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS: AUSTRALIA, CANADA, GERMANY, THE NETHERLANDS, NEW ZEALAND, THE UNITED KINGDOM, AND THE UNITED

Single Payer 101 Training Universal Health Care for Massachusetts http://masscare.org What s Wrong With Our Health Care System? (the easy part) U.S. Has Lowest Life Expectancy in the Industrialized World

21 SOUTH-WEST EUROPE SOUTH-WEST EUROPE Croatia, Cyprus, Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain Access to medicines and medical devices in Mediterranean EU Member States As members of the EU, all

Labour Market, Social Policy, Social Security System and Migration Policy - Current State and Problems Which Bulgaria Faces February 21, 2003, Bratislava I. Labour market- current state, problems and undertaken

An Overview of Medicaid in North Carolina * Lisa J. Berlin Center for Child and Family Policy Duke University Abstract: In North Carolina, as in other states, Medicaid cost containment is an increasingly

International Social Security Association Afric ISSA Meeting of Directors of Social Security Organizations in Asia and the Pacific Seoul, Republic of Korea, 9-11 November 2005 Current challenges in delivering

Voluntary Health Insurance: International Experience, Evidence and Prospects for the Russia Federation Moscow June 28, 2011 The workshop will take place in Moscow on the 28 of June 2011, as part of the

THE PENSION SYSTEM IN ROMANIA 1. THE PENSION SYSTEM MAIN FEATURES The pension system in Romania has undergone numerous reforms over the recent years, aimed at improving the sustainability of the system

NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE HEALTHCARE FOR ALL SOUTH AFRICANS The plan for National Health Insurance National Health Insurance is a way of providing good healthcare for all by sharing the money available

Access to Medicines within the State Health Insurance Program for Pension Age Population in Georgia (country) Tengiz Verulava Doctor of Medical Science. Head of School "Health Policy and Management". Ilia

Private Health Insurance in OECD Countries Health Insurance for an Expanded Europe: New Public-Private Options The Prague Symposium 2004 Nicole Tapay(Novartis)* *Based on work performed under OECD private

First Pan-European Nurse Educators Conference Udine, November 2007 The Career Pathways of Nurse Educators in Europe: A Collaborative Project BASELINE INFORMATION GATHERING SHEET One of the important early

BARACK OBAMA S PLAN FOR A HEALTHY AMERICA: Lowering health care costs and ensuring affordable, high-quality health care for all The U.S. spends $2 trillion on health care every year, and offers the best

Germany Statistics In 2002, 56 per cent of the German population reported having used a form of complementary medicine during the previous year (Institut für Demoskopie Allensbach 2002). Naturopathy (including

www.pwc.com.br The Healthcare market in Brazil Brazilian Healthcare market: one of the most promising and attractive in the world Context Fifth largest country in area and population, with 8.51 million

To ensure the functioning of the site, we use cookies. We share information about your activities on the site with our partners and Google partners: social networks and companies engaged in advertising and web analytics. For more information, see the Privacy Policy and Google Privacy &amp Terms.
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.